Aortic Dissections in the Population-Based Danish National Patient Registry from 1996–2016: A Validation Study

Purpose This study evaluated the validity of the ICD-10 diagnostic codes for aortic dissections (ADs) in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) based upon positive predictive values (PPV). Patients and methods Cases registered in the DNPR with the unspecific AD diagnostic code DI710 (unspecified AD) from 1996 to 2016, and the specific AD diagnostic codes DI710A (AD Type A) and DI710B (AD Type B) from 2006 to 2016, were included. Available medical records from all registered cases underwent review. Confirmed cases of AD served as “gold standard” when reporting PPV. PPV estimates were stratified by regional differences, date, age at time of diagnosis, and sex. Results A total of 5018 cases were identified in the DNPR. After merging of data and retrieval of medical records, 3767 cases were eligible for validation. Of these, 2677 cases were verified as AD type A (59.7%), AD type B (38.8%), and unspecified type of AD (1.5%). The average age at diagnosis was 65.1 ±13.0 years (67.3% males). The overall PPV for having an AD when one of the three diagnostic codes were registered from 1996 to 2016 was 71.1% (95% confidence interval (CI): 69.6–72.5) and increased significantly over time. From 2006 to 2016, the PPV for the specific AD diagnostic codes was 89.5% (95% CI: 87.4–91.3), whilst the PPV for the unspecific diagnostic code was 63.5% (95% CI: 61.1–65.9). Conclusion We found the overall PPV for the pooled AD diagnostic codes in the DNPR acceptable. However, the two specific AD diagnostic codes presented remarkably higher PPV compared to the unspecific diagnostic code.

[1]  J. Steuer,et al.  Sex differences and temporal trends in aortic dissection: a population-based study of incidence, treatment strategies, and outcome in Swedish patients during 15 years , 2020, European heart journal.

[2]  A. Kuehnl,et al.  Hospital Incidence and In‐Hospital Mortality of Surgically and Interventionally Treated Aortic Dissections: Secondary Data Analysis of the Nationwide German Diagnosis‐Related Group Statistics From 2006 to 2014 , 2019, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[3]  Sigrun Alba Johannesdottir Schmidt,et al.  The Danish National Patient Registry: a review of content, data quality, and research potential , 2015, Clinical epidemiology.

[4]  J. Hallas,et al.  Comparison of the Five Danish Regions Regarding Demographic Characteristics, Healthcare Utilization, and Medication Use—A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study , 2015, PloS one.

[5]  S. Rabkin,et al.  Increasing prevalence of hypertension among patients with thoracic aorta dissection: trends over eight decades--a structured meta-analysis. , 2014, American journal of hypertension.

[6]  Henrik Toft Sørensen,et al.  The Danish Civil Registration System as a tool in epidemiology , 2014, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[7]  V. Aboyans,et al.  [2014 ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases]. , 2014, Kardiologia polska.

[8]  Elsebeth Lynge,et al.  The Danish National Patient Register , 2011, Scandinavian journal of public health.

[9]  S. Lemaire,et al.  Epidemiology of thoracic aortic dissection , 2011, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[10]  A Evangelista,et al.  The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease. , 2000, JAMA.

[11]  G. Noon,et al.  Dissection and dissecting aneurysms of the aorta: twenty-year follow-up of five hundred twenty-seven patients treated surgically. , 1982, Surgery.